Category Archives: Original

Winnipeg Outlines Historic Corporate Welfare Plan

AlternativeFreePress.com

Winnipeg has announced a corporate welfare scheme for transit, a bus lane, which is the largest municipal infrastructure project in the city’s history. The project is eligible to receive up to $587.3 million from Ottawa, the province of Manitoba, and the City of Winnipeg.

The city will be going into further debt to cover it’s portion, suggesting the loan payments could be generated by raising transit fares, property taxes or both. Obviously since the feds and province are already in obscene amounts of debt, they will also be using debt to finance the project. The money will be borrowed from private banks, given to a private company for maintenance, and the interest owing will compound.

The Harper con-government supports the project and is clear that corporate welfare transit projects should be a top priority.

Winnipeg will pay a private company to maintain the corridor until 2049. This redistribution of public dollars to private corporate interests is similar to the corporate welfare schemes used by the city for the Chief Peguis Trail extension & Disraeli Bridges Project, but is the first time such a scheme has been used for transit in Canada

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Winnipeg Outlines Historic Corporate Welfare Plan by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Source: Winnipeg Free Press

Canada’s Mandatory Minimum Sentences Declared Unconstitutional, Again

AlternativeFreePress.com

BC Provincial Court Judge Reg Harris has found that Canada’s mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking drugs are unconstitutional. Specifically finding that “the impugned legislation casts a net much wider than is necessary to address the stated objective of protecting young persons,” and that “persons can become subject to the mandatory minimum in circumstances where their actions do not run the risk of exposing youth to the vagaries of drug trafficking.”

This is not the first time that Harper’s tough on drugs legislation has been found unconstitutional. Just under a year ago, BC Provincial Court Judge Joseph Galati sentenced Joseph Ryan Lloyd to 191 days behind bars, saying that that the 1 year mandatory minimum sentence prescribed was a violation of the Charter of Rights and declared it “of no force and effect.” Last year also saw the courts find that it was unconstitutional to forbid licensed medical marijuana users from possessing cannabis edibles.

Harper’s Con-government has an extensive history of writing unconstitutional legislation. In 2013 Ontario’s top court ruled that their three-year mandatory minimum sentence for gun possession is “cruel and unusual punishment,” and their 2014 anti-prostitution law is excepted to be ruled unconstitutional in the future. They also face similar criticism of their Citizen Voting Act, recent changes to the Citizenship Act, and their omnibus budget bills.

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Canada’s Mandatory Minimum Sentences Declared Unconstitutional, Again by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Sources:
Drug-dealing law intended to protect minors is unconstitutional, judge decides
B.C. judge says mandatory minimum for drug offences is unconstitutional
Lawyers argue law to revoke Canadian citizenship is unconstitutional
Canada’s new anti-prostitution law is still unconstitutional, say sex workers
Mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes ruled unconstitutional

Microsoft’s temporary foreign workers: Canada sets a dangerous new precedent in corporate welfare

AlternativeFreePress.com

Canada’s Conservative/Con-artist government has created a new loophole around labour laws, granting an exemption to Microsoft allowing them to use temporary foreign workers without even pretending to look for Canadians to fill the jobs first.

The feds ridiculously claim the arrangement will create jobs for Canadians. Apparently, the government expects you to believe that eliminating qualified Canadians from the pool of applicants and replacing them with a revolving door of temporary foreign workers will create more jobs for Canadians.

The CBC quotes Toronto immigration lawyer Lorne Waldman: “There is certainly no justification that I can see that would support granting an exemption to a large number of foreign workers to come into Canada to take away jobs that could easily filled by Canadians… On the one hand, the government is telling us they are protecting Canadian jobs; on the other hand they’re signing agreements with big corporations in which they’re allowing them to bring in foreign workers.”

Because foreign workers will be working in Canada for only 24 month periods, Citizenship and Immigration Canada spokesperson Sonia Lesage claims that the foreign workers are not going to be entering the Canadian workforce, and therefore won’t be competing with Canadian workers. Is Sonia Lesange completely out of her mind? How can any sane person make such claims and expect the public to take them seriously? These workers will be taking “jobs in Canada that require work permits, and they could find Canadian graduates from computer science programs to fill them”, says a source who works in immigration law.

Microsoft is in bed with the Harper government specifically to get around labour laws. Karen Jones, Microsoft’s deputy general counsel, has said specifically that the deal will allow Microsoft to get around rules on visas for foreign workers. “The U.S. laws clearly did not meet our needs. We have to look to other places,” she told Bloomberg Businessweek. Obviously Canadian law did not meet their needs either, but Harper’s cronies are happy to make Microsoft exempt from the law.

As Waldman told the CBC: “There is no other exemption that is specific to a corporation, and it does not fall within any of the other categories where exemptions are normally given,”

This is a dangerous new precedent in corporate welfare.

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Microsoft’s temporary foreign workers: Canada sets a dangerous new precedent in corporate welfare by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Source: Foreign workers: Microsoft gets green light from Ottawa for foreign trainees (CBC)

Harper commits Canada to contribute corporate welfare

AlternativeFreePress.com

On Sunday November 16, 2014 Stephen Harper said Canada is preparing to make a contribution to a United Nations climate change fund following a $3 billion donation from the USA.

The climate change fund is a scam, sold as channeling money “to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change”. That may sound nice, but, as we reported previously, there are several reasons why this is a problem…

1. Foreign Aid is Corporate Welfare.

In Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins describes how he would convince the government leaders of underdeveloped countries to accept huge loans they could never pay off. He explains how those countries were then pressured politically so much that they were effectively neutralized and their economies crippled. Perkins describes the role of an Economic Hit Man as “a highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign “aid” organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet’s natural resources. Their tools included fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization.”

Let’s look at an example of how nice sounding green initiatives are often just corporate welfare…

The BC’s Pacific Carbon Trust takes about $14 million dollars from taxpayers per year and transfers it to large corporations.

Jordan Bateman with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation explains that “taxpayer money flowed exclusively into the pockets of corporations, including some of the largest companies in the province. Lafarge, a $20 billion company, was paid by the Trust for 22,998 carbon credits. Encana, an $8.8 billion company, sold 84,276 credits. Canfor, a $2.5 billion company, sold 41,573 credits. Other sellers included TimberWest and Interfor.”

2. Binding Agreements & Loss Of Sovereignty.

While this climate agreement may not yet legally bind countries into the corporate welfare scheme, that is the endgame.

The New York Times reports that officials fear this type of agreement which will not will not bind countries to spend billions of dollars. They desperately want a binding agreement. Richard Muyungi, a climate negotiator for Tanzania is quoted “Without an international agreement that binds us, it’s impossible for us to address the threats of climate change… We are not as capable as the U.S. of facing this problem, and historically we don’t have as much responsibility. What we need is just one thing: Let the U.S. ratify the agreement. If they ratify the agreement, it will trigger action across the world.”

These international agreements seek to destroy nations sovereignty, they attempt to override laws of local, regional and national governments… and this has been planned for a long time.

The Club of Rome was founded in 1968 by David Rockefeller, it’s members include business leaders, Heads of State, UN bureaucrats, diplomats, politicians and government officials from all over the world.

In 1990 The Club of Rome published The First Global Revolution, where they outlined how they would create or exaggerate environmental threats with the intention of manipulating the public into giving up their sovereignty to one world government:

“The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

3. Debt.

This climate agreement is being presented under the guise of rich countries helping countries in need, but really it is countries already in debt, getting into more debt, in order to get other countries into debt.

The “rich” countries are not really rich when you consider their debt, every dollar of aid given is borrowed with interest owing and compounding. Increasing debt and devaluing the dollar.

The “developing” countries can certainly use help, but the strings attached to this type of help will leave them with more debt than they can handle. This will leave them vulnerable to exploitation and allow corporations to pillage resources.

Banksters (central banks) create fiat currency and loan it to the government, it is then given to banksters (world bank / IMF) who loan it to developing countries. Debt on top of debt, interest plus more interest.

Sources:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-says-canada-will-contribute-to-poor-countries-climate-change-fund/article21604820/

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obama-pursuing-climate-accord-in-lieu-of-treaty.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jordan-bateman/carbon-bc_b_1723907.html

http://www.green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man

Alternative Free Press -fair use-

Whistleblower exposes US Government’s cover up of fraud by bank

AlternativeFreePress.com

Alayne Fleischmann is a Securities Lawyer and former employee of JP Morgan Chase who has recently disclosed the US government’s involvement with covering up the “biggest cases of white-collar crime in American history.”

Fleischmann provided these details in an interview with Rolling Stone in which she describes working for JP Morgan Chase as a deal manager between 2006 and 2008. She witnessed crimes relating to compliance and diligence sabotage including intimidation, abuse, “toxic loans”, and policies such as banning email to avoid paper trails.

Apparently, that was just the tip of the iceburg:

Everything that I thought was bad at the time turned out to be a million times worse” Alayne Fleischmann

According to Rolling Stone, Fleischmann sent a letter to William Buell, a managing director at JP Morgan Chase. The letter “warned Buell of the consequences of reselling bad loans as securities and gave detailed descriptions of breakdowns in Chase’s diligence process.”

Amazingly, instead of prosecuting JP Morgan Chase, the government “decided to help Chase bury the evidence” and charges against the bank, were “suddenly canceled, and no complaint was filed.”

Fleischmann serves as an extraordinary role model, unafraid to stand up against the corrupt powers that be:
I could be sued into bankruptcy. I could lose my license to practice law. I could lose everything, but if we don’t start speaking up, then this really is all we’re going to get: the biggest financial cover-up in history.” – Alayne Fleischmann

(Read the Rolling Stone article here: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-9-billion-witness-20141106)

Compiled by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Whistleblower exposes US Government’s cover up of fraud by bank by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Alternative Free Press -fair use-

Obama Pursuing Global Corporate Welfare Climate Accord

AlternativeFreePress.com

The Obama administration is pushing for an international climate change agreement to funnel more tax dollars into the hands of large corporations. The New York Times reports that despite the fact that the Constitution requires a president obtain approval from a two-thirds majority of the Senate, Obama plans on sidestepping his oath with “some legal and political magic”.

The climate accord would legally require countries to enact domestic climate change policies as well as make voluntarily pledges to specific levels of emissions cuts and to channel money “to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change”.

That may sound nice, but there are several reasons why this is a problem…

1. Foreign Aid is Corporate Welfare.

In Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins describes how he would convince the government leaders of underdeveloped countries to accept huge loans they could never pay off. He explains how those countries were then pressured politically so much that they were effectively neutralized and their economies crippled. Perkins describes the role of an Economic Hit Man as “a highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign “aid” organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet’s natural resources. Their tools included fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization.”

Let’s look at an example of how nice sounding green initiatives are often just corporate welfare…

The BC’s Pacific Carbon Trust takes about $14 million dollars from taxpayers per year and transfers it to large corporations.

Jordan Bateman with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation explains that “taxpayer money flowed exclusively into the pockets of corporations, including some of the largest companies in the province. Lafarge, a $20 billion company, was paid by the Trust for 22,998 carbon credits. Encana, an $8.8 billion company, sold 84,276 credits. Canfor, a $2.5 billion company, sold 41,573 credits. Other sellers included TimberWest and Interfor.”

2. Binding Agreements & Loss Of Sovereignty.

While this climate agreement may not yet legally bind countries into the corporate welfare scheme, that is the endgame.

The New York Times reports that officials fear this type of agreement which will not will not bind countries to spend billions of dollars. They desperately want a binding agreement. Richard Muyungi, a climate negotiator for Tanzania is quoted “Without an international agreement that binds us, it’s impossible for us to address the threats of climate change… We are not as capable as the U.S. of facing this problem, and historically we don’t have as much responsibility. What we need is just one thing: Let the U.S. ratify the agreement. If they ratify the agreement, it will trigger action across the world.”

These international agreements seek to destroy nations sovereignty, they attempt to override laws of local, regional and national governments… and this has been planned for a long time.

The Club of Rome was founded in 1968 by David Rockefeller, it’s members include business leaders, Heads of State, UN bureaucrats, diplomats, politicians and government officials from all over the world.

In 1990 The Club of Rome published The First Global Revolution, where they outlined how they would create or exaggerate environmental threats with the intention of manipulating the public into giving up their sovereignty to one world government:

“The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

3. Debt.

This climate agreement is being presented under the guise of rich countries helping countries in need, but really it is countries already in debt, getting into more debt, in order to get other countries into debt.

The “rich” countries are not really rich when you consider their debt, every dollar of aid given is borrowed with interest owing and compounding. Increasing debt and devaluing the dollar.

The “developing” countries can certainly use help, but the strings attached to this type of help will leave them with more debt than they can handle. This will leave them vulnerable to exploitation and allow corporations to pillage resources.

Banksters (central banks) create fiat currency and loan it to the government, it is then given to banksters (world bank / IMF) who loan it to developing countries. Debt on top of debt, interest plus more interest.

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Obama Pursuing Global Corporate Welfare Climate Accord by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obama-pursuing-climate-accord-in-lieu-of-treaty.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jordan-bateman/carbon-bc_b_1723907.html

http://www.green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man

Alternative Free Press -fair use-

Herr Harper’s Canada

You won’t recognize Canada when I’m through with it” -Stephen Harper

Here are just 4 of the many ways Stephen Harper is drastically changing Canada in 2014:

1. Corporate for-profit health care

The barely hidden agenda is to unravel Canada’s signature public health care model in favour of an aggregate of more expensive, more fragmented, and less universal corporate models.

Just as the Harper government corrupted the environmental file (in the name of “streamlining”), by drastically removing federal oversight and involvement (vacating jurisdiction), so too is it “vacating jurisdiction” of health care.

The agenda is being achieved by starving the provinces of required funding. Once the 2014 Health Accord is expired, the Harper government will reduce its Canada Health Transfers (CHT’s), — monies transferred from the federal government to the provinces – by$36 billion, up to the end of 2024.

The void of insufficient funding will be filled by corporate health care.

Once this is achieved, Canadians’ access to health care will be restricted, user fees will increase, insurance coverage will cost more, and patient fatalities will rise in number.

Here are some numbers.

According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, public health care costs less than $180 per month per Canadian, while a private insurer in the U.S. charges three times that amount for comparable service.

Even worse, according to a study by Dr. P.J. Devereaux, and published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, if we switch to for-profit hospitals, over 2,000 more Canadians will die needlessly each year.

What are the drivers behind this agenda which is contrary to the wishes of about 86 per cent of Canadians?

According to the Council Of Canadians (who must surely be on Harper’s “enemy list”) there are three drivers:

– Private investors, many based in the U.S, who want to cash in on Canadian health care (NAFTA guarantees equal treatment to U.S companies competing against our public system.)

– Canadian for-profit providers and insurers.

– Cash-starved provincial governments.

rabble.ca (2013)

That is the long term plan, but there is unfortunately also a shortcut:

We’re at risk of losing our public health care system in 2014.

Right now, there’s a legal challenge in motion that could erase Canadian Medicare as we know it – resulting in a two-tier, US-style health care system.

Dr. Brian Day, owner of Vancouver’s for-profit Cambie Surgery Centre and the leading proponent of privatized health care, launched a constitutional challenge in 2008 that is going to court in September of 2014. This challenge aims to break Medicare in Canada by striking down provincial health legislation that limits the for-profit delivery of medically necessary services, claiming that these rules violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Parties in the case, including the BC government, are calling this the most significant constitutional challenge in Canadian history. Although this case is being heard in British Columbia, experts agree that the case will be appealed and end up in the Supreme Court of Canada – that’s why it’s important to everyone in Canada.

If Dr. Day wins, he’ll open the floodgates to a US-style system that relies on private insurance, and allows providers to set any price on care that the market will allow.

BC health coalition (2014)

2. Festivals Without Freedom

RCMP are out in force and more than 500 security guards are on hand checking every bag for drugs and alcohol as the Squamish Music Festival gets underway today.

cbc.ca (2014)

Police enforcement at festivals has been increasing steadily since 2009, shortly after Harper took power:

There was a much stronger uniform presence this year, after the event was identified as requiring higher-than-normal levels of policing, with members being drawn from across the region from the Drug Canine Units, the Integrated Road Safety Unit, the Kootenay Boundary Regional RCMP detachment, and more.

boundary sentinel (2010)

3. Strictly Controlled Internet

Bill C-13 offers service providers immunity for disclosing sensitive information to police and other authorities without a warrant. This isn’t just hypothetical, either—Canadian authorities have been making millions of these requests each year for quite some time.
[…]
With Parliament off for its summer vacation, Bill C-13 is sitting in a strange limbo. Thanks to a recent Supreme Court decision, it’s likely that at least parts of C-13 are unconstitutional. This includes the provisions giving legal immunity to service providers who disclose customer information to authorities without a warrant and without the customer’s knowledge.

Despite the court case, the Harper government has shown no intention of going back to the drawing board, or even at least splitting Bill C-13 in two to allow for more debate and input from privacy advocates. This is troubling, since the government is refusing to listen to the privacy expert they just appointed by not even splitting the bill.

What does the future hold, then, for C-13? If Minister MacKay presses forward as he’s indicated when Parliament resumes, it’s likely that the government could find itself in yet another high-level court case about privacy. With lawsuits from civil liberties watchdog groups already on the books over unaccountable spying at CSEC, we could see a legal action from players in the tech-activist privacy coalition against C-13.

As the government keeps silent about making any changes to Bill C-13, it’s stubbornly signaling that it doesn’t care much about Canadians’ privacy. Given its track record, we shouldn’t count ourselves as surprised. But we do know that the Harper government does care about its perception as pro-business. As mainstream outcry grows against this “cyberbullying” bill and businesses line up on the side of reasonable privacy protection, the government may finally change its tune.

vice.ca (2014)

Bill C-13 isn’t the only threat to internet privacy. The Trans-Pacific Partnership will end the open Internet as we know it by criminalizing our online activity, invading our privacy, and making our ability to access the Internet far more expensive.

Internet providers will be forced to block content for subscribers who are alleged to have engaged in small-scale downloading or sharing of copyrighted material. It could also kick individuals and even entire families off the Internet for allegations of copyright infringement alone.
Internet providers would be forced to act as ‘Internet cops’, actively monitoring websites for banned links and for any alleged copyright infringement. As costs would be passed on to customers, this would make your Internet more expensive and would result in a stifling Internet censorship regime.
A complete overhaul of Canadian copyright law and potential changes to privacy law that would undermine our digital rights.

rabble.ca (2013)

4. Dirty Water, Very Dirty Water

The recent disaster at the Mount Polley mine serves as just 1 recent example of water in Canada after a few years with Harper’s fraudulent majority.

A complete water ban affecting about 300 local residents is in effect after five million cubic metres of tailings pond wastewater from the Mount Polley copper and gold mine was released early Monday into Hazeltine Creek.

That’s an amount of water equivalent to about 2,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

Local residents are calling it an environmental disaster.

The waterways affected by the ban, which earlier included Quesnel Lake, Polley Lake, Hazeltine Creek and Cariboo Creek, now also include the entire Quesnel and Cariboo river systems right up to the salmon-bearing Fraser River.

cbc.ca (2014)

Reports of sickly salmon with skin that’s peeling off have prompted a First Nations fishing shutdown in British Columbia’s Cariboo region, which was hit by a mining waste spill this week.

“We are closing all fishing activities down the river immediately, fish are being found very sickly as we speak,” read a notice issued Thursday by the chiefs of the Xaxli’p, Sek’wel’was and Tsk’way’laxw First Nations near Lillooet.

The Secwepemc Fisheries Commission issued a similar advisory telling its members to “exercise caution and stop fishing until further notice.”

huffingtonpost.ca (2014)

The Harper government is waging war on Canada’s freshwater.

We didn’t start with a strong record. Our national water laws are out-dated, we don’t properly enforce the ones we have and we chronically underfund source water and watershed protection. And consecutive governments refuse to consider the effect on freshwater when creating economic, industrial, energy or trade policies.

Yet the Harper government appears intent on systematically dismantling the few protections that have been put in place at the federal level to protect our freshwater heritage.

In its 2011 budget, the Harper government announced a reduction of over $222 million from the budget of Environment Canada and the elimination of over 1,200 jobs in the department. Programs to protect water, such as the Action Plan on Clean Water, which funds water remediation in Lakes Winnipeg and Simcoe among others, were particularly hard hit. Others targeted for deep cuts include the Chemicals Management Plan and the Contaminated Sites Action Plan, both of which are crucial to source water protection.

These cuts followed the cancellation of a major B.C. coastal conservation project after lobbying by the energy industry and the weakening of key elements of the Navigable Waters Protection Act, which eliminated mandatory environmental assessments for major developments such as bridges and dams on Canadian rivers.

But the big guns have come out in the current Budget Implementation Bill. Parks Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans will lose over $100 million in funding and many hundreds of employees between them, which will have devastating impacts on water conservation and watershed protection. Fully cut are the urban wastewater research program and integrated monitoring of water and air quality.

The Fisheries Act, which made it a criminal offence to pollute or destroy fish and fish habitat in Canada and the only federal water protection law with teeth, is being gutted. Already, the Harper government allows the mining industry to apply to have healthy fish-bearing bodies of water to be renamed “tailings impoundment areas” and thus no longer subject to protection of the Act.

But the new rules remove legal protection of fish habitat, allowing harm to fish and habitat based on the “on-going productivity” of commercial fisheries. In essence, the new rules legalize activity that destroys wetlands, lakes and rivers unless these habitats can be proven to have a defined economic value.

Industry will now have unprecedented influence over water protection policy and the Harper cabinet will make decisions about which watersheds deserve protection based on political, not scientific, grounds.

The 2012 federal budget also repeals the Canadian Environment Assessment Act and replaces it with a new law that limits the length of time the assessment process can take, sets strict limits on who can appear before a panel and allows Cabinet to opt out of projects it does not want assessed.

With the plethora of pipelines planned to carry Alberta tar sands bitumen — the dirtiest oil on earth — over fragile watersheds all across Canada, the politicization of the environmental assessment process poses an irreversible threat to our freshwater systems. The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline to the B.C coast alone would pass over at least 1,000 waterways.

In a mean spirited move, the Harper government is killing the Global Environmental Monitoring System, an inexpensive project that monitors over 3,000 freshwater sites around the world for a U.N. database that Canada has proudly hosted for decades.

Cut too is the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, which recently published an important paper calling for an end to free or cheap water to resource extractive industries. Perhaps this report was unpopular with the energy and mining companies soon to benefit from the new environmental regime.

This, just months after the Harper government cut funding for the Canadian Environmental Network, a 34-year-old network that acted as a link between 640 small environmental groups and the federal government and which has been a fierce defender of local watersheds.

rabble.ca (2012)

This list is far from complete, in fact, it just scratches the surface.

Compiled by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Herr Harper’s Canada by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Alternative Free Press -fair use-

Drug prohibition has made meth production even more dangerous

AlternativeFreePress.com

Drug prohibition has once again made the world more dangerous. The Associated Press recently reported that Mexican gangs are importing meth into the US by turning it into liquid and then crystallizing it once it is in the USA. Mike Prado, resident agent in charge of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Investigation’s Fresno office claims these conversion labs are more dangerous than meth super-labs.

The super-labs driven south to Mexico are notoriously toxic to people and the environment, but Prado said the small conversion labs in the Central Valley are more dangerous. His agents have found them in densely populated apartment buildings and foreclosed homes in quiet neighbourhoods where children play on the street.

In the conversion process, cooks evaporate off the liquid and use highly combustible chemicals such as acetone to make crystals. The fumes are trapped inside. “A spark can turn this into a fireball,” Prado said.

So, once again drug prohibition proves futile by failing to prevent drugs from circulating, but it has also increased the danger to average citizens. Regardless of whether Mike Prado is correct that these conversion labs are more dangerous than meth super-labs, it’s clearly time to end the war on drugs.

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Drug prohibition has made meth production even more dangerous by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Source: Liquid meth pours into California in attempt to evade detection

New Study Links GMO To Leukemia; Bt is toxic

AlternativeFreePress.com

A new study published in the Journal of Hematology & Thromboembolic Diseases entitled Hematotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis as Spore-crystal Strains Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac or Cry2Aa in Swiss Albino Mice. indicates that genetically modified crops with Bacillus Thuringensis (Bt), may contribute to blood abnormalities such as leukemia. Many GM crops contain Bt.

The Brazilian study sought to establish the purported human and environmental safety of GM crops, in particular they looked at the impact that the Bt toxin has on species which it is not intended to target.

The study concludes:

Results showed that the Bt spore-crystals genetically modified to express individually Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac or Cry2A can cause some hematological risks to vertebrates,increasing their toxic effects with long-term exposure. Taking into account the increased risk of human and animal exposures to significant levels of these toxins, especially through diet, our results suggest that further studies are required to clarify the mechanism involved in the hematotoxicity found in mice, and to establish the toxicological risks to non-target organisms, especially mammals, before concluding that these microbiological control agents are safe for mammals.

This study makes a strong case that GMOs have not proven to be safe, as these scientists believe “further studies are required … before concluding that these microbiological control agents are safe for mammals.”

Interesting findings include:

– Bt toxins are capable of targeting mammalian cells, particularly red blood cells, this results in significant damage.
– Bt toxins suppress bone marrow proliferation resulting in abnormal lymphocyte patterns which can be consistent with leukemia.
– Bt toxin can cause blood changes indicating damage to bone marrow.
– Genetically Modified Bt spore-crystals induce hematotoxicity, cause in vitro hemolysis in cell lines of rat, mouse, sheep, horse, and human erythrocytes & the plasma membrane of susceptible cells may be the primary target for the toxins.
– Bt toxins can produce adverse effects when suspended in distilled water, this contradicts past claims of not requiring alkalinization via insect physiology to become activated.
– Bt toxin can cause blood changes indicating damage to bone marrow.
– Even just 27 mg/kg Cry1Ab can induce hypochromic anemia in mice.
– Bt toxins accumulate in fatty tissue and persist in the environment as their toxic impact increases after 72 hours of exposure.

Source: Hematotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis as Spore-crystal Strains Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac or Cry2Aa in Swiss Albino Mice

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
New Study Links GMO To Leukemia; Bt is toxic by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Study says alcohol can lead to psychosis, but not cannabis

AlternativeFreePress.com

The University of Calgary has published a study entitled “Impact of substance use on conversion to psychosis in youth at clinical high risk of psychosis” in the journal Schizophrenia Research. The 4 year study looks at substance use of alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco in an attempt to determine each substance’s association with the development of psychosis.

Researchers determined that cannabis did not increase the likelihood of psychosis. On the other hand, the study suggests that alcohol use could increase the likelihood of psychosis.

The Abstract reads: “Results revealed that low use of alcohol, but neither cannabis use nor tobacco use at baseline, contributed to the prediction of psychosis in the CHR sample.”

Source: Schizophrenia Research

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Study says alcohol can lead to psychosis, but not cannabis by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.